Targets for Copenhagen Dec. 2009 : UNFCCC, COP-15 *

2020 target

2050 target  (CO2 level in 2008 was 385 ppm)

Funds for adaptation and mitigation

IPCC, Tyndall Centre, UN (1)

Cut 20-25% from 1990 level

Cut 80-95% by 2050

UNFCCC-GEF, new Climate Change Fund, REDD (2)

EU, G8, MEF (23)

EU to cut 20% (measured how?),  30% if other developing countries follow suit (16)

Cut 80% (perhaps more if required by a 2°C warming target ). Canada reneges from G8 with 60-70% target (23)

cap-and-trade (ETS), mitigation funding offer Sep 09: in addition to carbon trading funds, EU will contribute €2-15/yr of  €22-50 billion/yr needed by 2020 (28)

US Obama plan

Cut 4% (=20% below 2005) and progressive cuts in following decade (36), replacing his previous target of  0%=17% below 2005 (16)(21)  see also ACES box below, and Obama's Plan B if Senate fails to act (32)

Offer to match EU?

cap-and-trade (3) Newly revised Treasury Department documents show US position is still vague (29)

US eco-groups 1sky, 350.org (7)

see also Green Development Rights A 350 ppm Emergency Pathway Oct 2009 study (34)

Cut 20%

Cut 80%, < 350 ppm

cap-and-auction

WBCSD: World Business Council for Sustainable Development (8)

?

Cut 50%, < 550 ppm

cap-and-trade, CDM and JI, World Bank carbon funds (9)

Developing countries

Some sectoral cuts, national intensity targets (NAMA)

? no commitments to date

big Adaptation funds: ~ $600b is needed, according to the UN (4)

France/EU Oct 2009 "plan justice-climat" (details in 33)

G77/China





Japan


China


India






Brazil


Africa

Developed countries cut 25-40% from 1990 level

Developed countries cut 40%, developing countries 0% because of 'ecological debt' (12)

Nov 2009: China agrees to 40-45% if DCs will fund mitigation esp. tech transfer (36)(24)

- new Japanese PM offers 25% cut (31) vs 7% previous govt-business proposal  (14)

China's target is a net increase = 20% below 2005 (15)

India refuses any targets (17a, 24) but will match developing countries' average per capita emissions (17b)

Australia offers 5% cut (19)

Russia offers 10-15% (21)

NZ offers a pitiful 10-20% (25)

Brazil targets still unclear (27)


Tobin Tax to create mitigation funds, REDD

reform of GEF, big Adaptation funds, REDD, and technology transfer -- not controlled by developed countries (5)


China demands funding by rich countries: 1% of GDP (24)











Brazil demands REDD, mitigation funding (27)

African delegates threaten to pull out of COP-15 unless rich countries provide by 2020: $67b/year for adaptation, $200b or .5% of GDP for mitigation (26)

Oxfam, Greenpeace, FOE (10)

Climate Action Network CAN / Reseau Action Climat and 350.org  (35)

Developed countries cut 40%,

Emission peak by 2015

Cut 80%

cap-and-auction, Adaptation funds of $150b-195b yearly, major reform of GEF, close ICE and ban speculation in global commons, no World Bank control of carbon funds (11)

Oliver Tickell book Kyoto2 (13)

upstream caps and auctions, major changes in agriculture, 5 principles


Cap-and-auction, new Climate Change Fund, REDD    

        

European Youth Climate Movement (18)

Cut 40%, restricted to 5% in offsets

Cut 95%

$160b climate fund from cap-and-auction, + tax on international transport;     


climate NGOs draft Copenhagen treaty 8 Jun 09 (20)

rich Annex I Zero Carbon Action Plans: cut 40%, restricted to 40% in renewables.


Annex II: binding targets in Low Carbon Action plans


Developing countries: new Action Plans with CCF help.


-- all plans to be scientifically based within a Global Carbon Budget, review based on IPCC AR5 to start in 2013 unless reopened earlier by "emergency" clause.

Annex I: cut 95%, 66% in renewables



start review in 2013


start review in 2013

An independent CCF Copenhagen Climate Facility to replace CDM, with $160b climate fund from cap-and-auction for poor countries, including Action Plan capacity-building and MRV; Annex I must include international transport "bunker" fuels. Technology Action Plans: with development targets, global action plans, and CCF funds for tech transfer, "protect and share" principle to override TRIPs. An international REDD board to help Action Plans, build capacity, protect indigenous rights and bio-diversity. A Carbon Market Regulatory Agency  replacing Kyoto CDM with stricter standards and transparency; no nukes.

ACES Waxman-Markey bill final version  25 Jun 09 (21)





International Investors Forum on Climate Change 16 Sep marks a break between institutional investors and other business interests (29)

cut 17%: weakened by offsets and free pollution permits, renewable energy requirement only 20% instead of 40%, coal plants grandfathered, "clean coal" delayed to 2020




urges passage of ACES with strong renewable energy,

Copenhagen emissions cuts of 25-40%

? effect is unclear






Copenhagen emissions cuts of 50-85%

 Cap-and-trade of 4% of emissions by 2020, 68% of emissions by 2050: delays reductions, allows 50% in free pollution permits, only 15% to be auctioned.

Offsets to be “verifiable permanent and additional” but delay emission reduction to 2030. Stanford study (2008) says 1/3 to 2/3 of offset projects fail to reduce emissions.

- SRI investors call for reformed CDM, carbon trading and REDD


(Sources)


* The latest independent reports on negotiations are very pessimistic: see Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency Pledges and Actions (Oct 2009) and "Climate Change: Big Carbon Players Jockey for Advantage" by Stephen Leahy, IPS/Terraviva 16 June 09


  1. Recent scientific data show IPCC predictions were too conservative; emissions are rising faster, impacts being felt sooner, tipping points being passed, global warming likely to exceed 2ºC by 2050. Even the lowball IPCC predictions assumed a <20% chance of climate catastrophe. See http://mecteam.blogspot.com/2009/03/worst-case-global-warming-is-upon-us.html. But draft G8 documents show US negotiators are resisting scientifically based target: Reuters Jun 23 http://www.planetark.com/enviro-news/item/53486 

  1. See UNEP Green Economy Initiative http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/ and Global Canopy Programme Little REDD Book http://www.globalcanopy.org/main.php?m=117&sm=176&t=1 . Sweeping reform of the GEF is proposed by the Oxford-Cambridge Climate Strategies group: http://www.oxfordclimatepolicy.org/publications/mueller.html.

  2. Cap-and-trade: “It’s a bit like… handing control of the Earth’s vital natural systems over to a bunch of grinning Wall Street traders. Oh no, wait: it’s exactly like that:” Danny Chivers, in New Internationalist Jan 2009 reprinted here.

  3. Summarized in HSBC Climate Group The Green Rebound 19 Jan 2009, p.12.

  4. “A failed system” according to Kenneth Haar, Climate Summit Inc May 2009. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Trading_Scheme.

  5. G77/China Financial Mechanism for Meeting Financial Commitments under the Convention (presented at Poznan Dec 2008) http://unfccc.int/files/kyoto_protocol/application/pdf/g77_china_financing_1.pdf.

  6. USA eco groups: see http://mecteam.blogspot.com/2008/06/350-ppm-most-important-number-in-world.html

  7. See posting on Tim Flannery and WBCSD http://mecteam.blogspot.com/2009/02/greening-capitalism-tim-flannery.html. UNDP seems to have accepted the WBCSD targets. The WBCSD, founded by Maurice Strong, is composed of 200+ multinationals. WBCSD drives the UN's Marrakech process aka Sustainable Production and Consumption. Its official proposals are stated in Policy Directions to 2050 (2007) and Power to Change (Dec 2008) advocating sectoral targets, nukes, clean coal, CCS, and a "less burdensome" 550 ppm target with a possibility of 450 ppm with new technology; Towards a Low-Carbon Economy (Apr 2009) advocates energy efficiency, carbon markets, and strong  intellectual property requirements in tech transfers . For a more objective view of WBCSD activities see L. Hunter Lovins' survey in State of the World 2008 ch.3.

  8. World Bank carbon funds are sharply criticized by FOE and TWN Apr 2008. CDM is criticized by HBCS and Climate Strategies, n.2 and n.4.

  9. Oxfam International, Turning Carbon into Gold (Dec 2008) http://www.oxfam.org/policy/bp123-turning-carbon-gold; Copenhagen Climate Summit - Greenpeace Demands 23 March 2009 http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/climate-demands.pdf; Friends of the Earth-UK http://www.foe.co.uk/climatetalks/petition.html.

  10. Personal communication from Greenpeace organizer May 2009. FOE demands are in more general terms but similar.

  11. The Bolivian argument, backed by many developing countries: http://mecteam.blogspot.com/2009/05/ecological-debt-bolivian-position.html.

  12. Oliver Tickell, summarized in http://mecteam.blogspot.com/2008/12/oliver-tickells-kyoto2-proposals.html

  13. Japan's cabinet split (5 Jun 09): Industry minister rejects the Environment minister's proposed 15-25% cut : http://www.pddnet.com/news-ap-aso-ministers-fail-to-agree-on-japans-midterm-emi-060509/. Japan's official position at Bonn was an illusory 14% cut from 2005 levels. This amounts to 7% from 1990: http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2009/06/10/1. The weak Japanese government may not even be able to force industry to accept 7%, though WWF Japan and the Environment Minister say 15%+  is possible: Finnish Institute of International Affairs 18 May 09 and 26 May 09. See also by Alex Luta, Climate sudoku: Japan's bumpy ride towards a post-2012 target (PDF, the Institute, 24 June 2009).
  14. China's "cut" would be a net increase above 1990. US envoy Todd Stern's negotiations in Beijing (9 Jun 09)  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090609/ap_on_re_as/as_china_us_climate_1  But see the cogent analysis of Chinese green initiatives by Julian Wong (4 Jun 09) http://greenleapforward.com/2009/06/04/chinas-climate-progress-by-the-numbers/ and Worldwatch/Beijing GEI China Watch reports: http://www.worldwatch.org/taxonomy/term/53
  15. Todd Stern, in Bloomberg News 30 May 09 http://business.smh.com.au/business/china-must-play-climate-role-20090530-bqtk.html. See also summary by Jake Schmidt of NDRC of Stern's negotiating strategy 30 Mar 09. US position confirmed 12 June by Reuters/AP - see note 18. http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jschmidt/todd_sterns_first_official_foray.html
  16. a. Environment minister Jairam Ramesh of India's new government (2 Jun 09) refuses emissions targets, attacks US Waxman-Markey import restrictions. "India lambastes 'pernicious' US carbon tariffs" FP 30 June 09. b. Other initiatives include EE and renewable carbon trading, solar, "clean coal". he predicts energy consumption will increase 6-7% yearly. Climate Group (India) news http://www.theclimategroup.org/news_and_events/india_election2009/. For a sympathetic and detailed analysis of India's position see Globe and Mail 6 Sep 09 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/india-doesnt-want-to-pay-for-climate-change-but-its-already-feeling-the-costs/article1278146/. See also the business-backed CSM's India Climate Watch http://www.climatechallengeindia.org/

  17. Draft Position of the European Youth Climate Movement, by email 16 June 09.

  18. Australia offers only 5% -- see summary of developed country positions by Reuters/AP 12 Jun 09 http://www.carbonpositive.net/viewarticle.aspx?articleID=1579
  19. A Copenhagen Climate Treaty full legal text of model treaty by a number of NGOs, version 1.0 for discussion, 8 Jun 09. One-page summary by D. Millar.

  20. “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” Mother Jones 22 Jun; M.Wara and D.G.Victor, A Realistic Policy on International Carbon Offsets (Stanford University, 2008); offsets delay by Wara's latest calculation (Jun 2009).

  21. Russia thus has room for a 19-24% emissions increase from current levels. Russia could easily cut over 30% below the 1990 level: Finnish Institute of International Affairs 23 Jun 09
  22. On July 9, the G8 and MEF announced a science-based target of 2°C requiring an 80% cut by 2050 by developed countries (Annex I). But developing countries refuse to commit to cut 50% by 2050: BBC 9 Jul 09 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8142825.stm and summary of national proposals http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8142342.stm. A seasoned journalist notes the 2°C  target set at COP-13 Bali by all parties was merely reaffirmed at l'Aquila by G8; to announce less would have revealed a total failure of negotiations: http://www.ledevoir.com/2009/07/11/258628.html. Backsliding has already started: Canada's oil lobby and Russia reject the 80% target as "incredible". G8 failed to agree on base year, target for 2020, or mitigation funding for poor countries. Canada's environment minister now claims 80% is just an average, reaffirms Conservative govt plan to cut only 60-70%. Other countries may also renege: Globe and Mail 10 Jul 09 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/target-found-in-g8s-climate-fight/article1211478/ and http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/obama-brings-emerging-nations-on-side/article1213010/. US threats of "green tariffs" and the Pope's timing of his encyclical Caritas et Veritate may have helped force the G8-MEF to this largely symbolic agreement: http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/06/24/24climatewire-possible-plan-for-tariffs-on-imports-from-ch-25103.html and http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/07/pope-urges-bold-world-economic-reform-before-g8-summit/. Climate scientists debate whether the target of 2°C is sufficient: 23 Apr 09  http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/04/hit-the-brakes-hard/ and 7 Jul 09  http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/0/why-g8-pledge-to-halve-emissio.html. Comments in the latter, and the latest Pew poll, show half the US population remain invincibly ignorant, their denial reinforced by partisan politics: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/828/global-warming
  23. Yu Qingtai, Beijing’s special representative for climate talks is quoted; India's Ramesh still refuses to set targets: Financial Times 5 Aug 09 http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d0a173a8-81d8-11de-9c5e-00144feabdc0.html
  24. New Zealand's new conservative minority government (National Party ) offers pitifully low 10-20% emission reductions below 1990 levels, partly by buying carbon credits, but claims this is better than the US Waxman-Markey bill. NZ negotiator Tim Groser says Copenhagen will be “very tough” and will not resolve all issues. 10 Aug 09  http://blog.taragana.com/n/new-zealand-pledges-to-cut-greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-up-to-20-percent-by-2020-135472/
  25. African demands funds for adaptation, mitigation and tech transfer. 4 Sep 09 http://www.nation.co.ke/News/africa/-/1066/652268/-/item/1/-/1gjgnyz/-/index.html
  26. Brazil's government promises to reduce the rate of Amazon deforestation, Reuters 6 Aug 09 http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN06327380; Brazilian Climate Alliance's semi-official position paper 2 Sep 09 http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=ind_focus.story&STORY=/www/story/09-02-2009/0005087501&EDATE=   
  27. Offer by EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimos, hoping to break the current deadlock: 10 Sep 09 http://www.eumonitor.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=134865
  28. US mitigation funding is still vague according to leaked US Treasury documents: 11 Sep 09 "Still no money for developing nations, G20 documents show" in Climatewire Finance http://www.eenews.net/cw/
  29. 16 Sep some 181 major institutional investors responsible for $13b funds, meeting in International Investors Forum on Climate Change in New York, urge passage of ACES and Copenhagen treaty, 25-40% emissions cuts by 2020, 50-85% cuts by 2050, renewable energy, REDD, CDM. The Forum was timed to influence the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh Sep 17 (for background, see EuropeanVoice.com). A friend who is an SRI expert comments: "The International Investors Forum (IIF) is not SRI but greenwash and corporate doubletalk by the BAU group. It wants to protect the status quo by insuring all the bad derivatives are in place to enhance returns from market mechanisms and carbon certificates.": personal communication, 17 Sep 09.
  30. Japan's PM-elect Yukio Hatoyama promises 25% cuts despite opposition by business lobbies Keidanren and Keizai Doyukai : Reuters 7 Sep 09 http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/T38860.htm Under pressure from energy-intensive corporations in electricity, steel, cement, auto and chemicals, the previous rightwing government had overruled its own environment minister. See note (14). 
  31. EPA official says Obama has backup Plan B if Senate fails to act: EurActiv 25 Sep 09 http://www.euractiv.com/en/climate-change/us-official-backup-plan-climate-bill-fails/article-185757
  32. details of France's "plan climat-justice" 21-30 Oct 2009:
  33. France is trying to break the logjam of climate negotiations, according to reports from Agence France Presse and Reuters. On 21 Oct, environment minister J-L Borloo and on 30 Oct president Sarkozy announced a "plan justice-climat" in which France, Germany, and Austria are trying to convince the EU to make common cause with Mexico, Brazil, small island states threatened by climate change (SIDS), poor African and Asian countries among the 175 haggling "parties" in COP-15 to save Copenhagen. Main points of the plan:
    1. - a "wafer-thin" Tobin tax of 0.01% on financial speculation, already proposed in August by the UK's re-regulation chief Lord Hudson. The City and Wall St were "appalled" by his suggestion which means, as seasoned financial journalist Eric Reguly concludes, that it might actually be effective in slowing the computer-driven speculation that has led to repeated market meltdowns. The tax would be a pin-prick in the side of the financial elephant but yield an estimated $20b yearly. About a quarter of this would be for reforestation.
    2. - it would provide mitigation funds for solar, wind, hydroelectric, biomass and reforestation projects in the poorest countries. A telephone-book-sized overview of such projects country by country (prepared over the last year by Bernard Kouchner's Foreign Ministry*), fills the gap of poor of non-existent action plans (NAMA) that such countries were supposed to prepare. Many have no funds to prepare such plans, let alone carry them out. [*I have been unable to find this overview online. French journalists report having seen the immense document.]
    3. [A warning note about mitigation: Even if this plan is agreed to, NGOs will have to be extremely watchful that carbon trading and REDD do not permit boondoggles by finance speculators and "free permits" to corporate polluters. Carbon trading and REDD are immense bribes to the corporate world. They should not be givewaways. Most of all, they must reduce real GHG emissions according to science-based targets. France is not renowned for international philanthropy. We must read the fine print. - DM]
    4. - it provides an end-run around the refusal of rich countries to finance mitigation funds and technology transfer. Repeated promises in NEPAD, MDGs, PRSP and LICUS, "green stimulus", "green new deal", reformed CDM, and World Bank carbon finance have proved to be so much hot air. The money to match the promises has never appeared. The G8 plead taxpayers' pockets are empty, but that is just this year's excuse. Trillions could be found to bail out banks, stockbrokers and auto companies, and to make "war on terror" while nothing has been forthcoming for global needs or the working poor at home.
    5. - a possible alliance with the G2: the US and China have been working on a secret climate deal in backroom talks that have already lasted several years. The sticking point seems to be US corporate demands for huge profits on "tech transfer". See TRIPS, also http://www.lejdd.fr/Ecologie/Climat/Actualite/Tout-depend-d-un-accord-sino-americain-146804/ http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/america_china_the_new_g2/ and the Sep-Oct 2009 issue of Foreign Affairs http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65243/michael-levi/copenhagens-inconvenient-truth (I will summarize this later)
    6. - emission reduction targets of 25-40% by 2020 for the rich countries. Real reductions, measured from the Kyoto base of 1990.
    7. - a World Environment Organization, similar to the World Trade Organization (with overruling power? not clear) to ensure national actions are measurable, reportable and verifiable (MRV)
    The silence of the English language press on all this is deafening. After 10 days, nothing in NY Times. Nothing in G&M. Six uncritical paragraphs in WSJ, sloppily rewritten from the original JDD interview with Borloo. One sketchy paragraph in The Nation. Even George Monbiot, who has written numerous columns on the Copenhagen logjam and 'ruthless liar" Tony Blair's campaign to become the next EU president, seems to have ignored it. So far.
    Updates:
    St Andrews, Scotland 9 Nov 09:     -- G20 fails on financial reform, climate action, and green economy. The"fossils" win again. The meeting of G20 Finance ministers just ended. The "crisis of capitalism" is officially over, so it's business as usual. No penalties for financial speculators. The US and Canada vetoed a Tobin tax. No mitigation funds for climate change. US-China "coordination" is an empty promise. All of which, the Swedish finance minister bitterly remarked, means “a very difficult situation in Copenhagen.” See the G20 ministers' rogues' gallery and the Nae tae G20 youth protest.
    FAO World Food Summit, Rome, 11 Nov 09 -- Billions for banks and automakers, none for the hungry. France, Germany, UK, Italy and Japan are backing out on their $20 billion promise for world food aid made earlier this year.
    Paris 19 Nov 09. Environment Minister Borloo has just tabled his "Plan Justice-Climat" (its English title is "A Project for the World". Here is a summary in English by WWW France.
34.  Greenhouse Development Rights, (a coalition of EcoEquity, Stockholm Environment Institute, HeinRich Boll Foundation, Christian Aid, and Oxfam)  A 350 ppm Emergency Pathway (Oct 2009). See 3 Nov 09 review by Dr Wil Burns.
35. Climate Action Network CAN / Reseau Action Climat Checklist for Copenhagen 24 Nov 2009. Highlights:
36. Louis-Gilles Francoeur reports in Montreal Le Devoir 27 Nov 2009: EU hails China promises of 40-45% intensity reduction by 2020. The USA promises cuts from 2005 base of  20%* by 2020, 30% by 2025, 42% by 2030 (* in reality only 4% in 2020 below Kyoto base level). Canada's Harper is forced to go to Copenhagen by public anger over his inaction, and a petition by 3000 scientists. He has still not announced any reduction plan before 2030, leaving the rest to "intensity" targets set by private industry.